September 21, 2008

Categories:

He's not offering much more in the way of specifics than McCain, but here are Obama's guidelines from a speech today in Charlotte:

As of now, the Bush Administration has only offered a concept with a staggering price tag, not a plan. Even if the U.S. Treasury recovers some or most of its investment over time, this initial outlay of up to $700 billion is sobering. And in return for their support, the American people must be assured that the deal reflects the basic principles of transparency, fairness, and reform.

First, there must be no blank check when American taxpayers are on the hook for this much money.

Second, taxpayers shouldn’t be spending a dime to reward CEOs on Wall Street.

Third, taxpayers should be protected and should be able to recoup this investment.

Fourth, this plan has to help homeowners stay in their homes.

Fifth, this is a global crisis, and the United States must insist that other nations join us in helping secure the financial markets.

Sixth, we need to start putting in place the rules of the road I’ve been calling for for years to prevent this from ever happening again.

And finally, this plan can’t just be a plan for Wall Street, it has to be a plan for Main Street. We have to come together, as Democrats and Republicans, to pass a stimulus plan that will put money in the pockets of working families, save jobs, and prevent painful budget cuts and tax hikes in our states

Barry Muhammed Marx, you represent everything that is bad and wrong about this country - and I'm talking about your alias name here, not your precise and succinct comment (which I happen to agree it in general).

This is exactly the case. A "bailout" of the banks without an effort to put a floor on the housing market will not work. Further, to get this passed, the burden of the crisis must be placed on all shoulders. Finally, with the market already broken, effort must be taken to keep homeowners in their homes to maintain the value of the asset, keep the housing market from tanking further, and be just plain fair. Also, the US cannot deal with this problem alone. We *must* get the help of other nations, we must be willing to own up to our mistakes, because we cannot handle the crisis alone. And they will help if asked, because the consequences of bank failure are unimaginable. But we must be willing to drop our arrogance and admit we need the help.

I about fell out of my chair after watching George Will and the rest of the ABC panel on George Stephanopolous show totally BLAST McCain as acting unpresidential this week, giving a rant instead of solutions.
The only candidate who is acting like a president right now is Obama.
McCain looks "PANICKED".

I'd like to add that taxpayers should have a representative on the board that decides executive compensation. Every company that benefits from this package should be forced into full disclosure, in advance, of executive compensation.

McCain's choice of Palin as his VP pick now seems extremely hollow. If this was the best decision he was capable of making then he doesn't deserve the job of President. Maybe he should be CEO of HP.

Cant wait to fire the pack of crowds in Washington, This is not conservatism, its greed, recklessness and shallowness. No wonder the current cheerleaders are thrilled by a non-thinker like Palin. If this is conservatism, let it DIE. Only then can we have true grounded conservative values.

None of these seven principles are in a meaningful sense Marxist, unless "Marxist" is being construed here to mean "anything other than a laissez-faire approach." 1, 3, and 7 are obvious principles - there needs to be a plan to use this 700 billion. As toxic as the mortgage debt is, it is not worthless. Subprime mortgage debt is still tied to some genuine assets. If the US government is taking it, it needs also to figure out what to do with it.
7 is also related to 2 - this needs to be a plan for broad economic recovery, not another hail mary pass on trickle down.
5 is simply true - though US mortgages were the backing of the securities that went bad, these were global securities, not US investments, and we aren't on the hook for all of the damage here.
6 is also simply true - a debacle like this one should never happen.
That leaves 4, which is also rational. Whatever problems exist with the subprime mortgages, they have successfully matched the assets in this debt (houses) with consumers who are ostensibly willing to pay for those assets (homeowners). Yes, we could foreclose the houses and attempt to re-sell them, but the fact of the matter is, if we can make it work with the current homeowners, it's cheaper and saner to do so. In the current market a foreclosed house that we're trying to re-mortgage is not really a better asset than a house on which we have given a ludicrously good mortgage aimed at putting a homeowner who doesn't financially belong there in the house and paying some amount of money for it.

We have to keep remiourselves that, as late as July, McCain has, as his Economic Advisor, no other than the NOTORIOUS PHIL GRAMM, the GODFATHER OF ECONOMIC CORRUPTION AND DEREGULATION. And Phil Gramm is still consulting the McCain Campaign on the sideline!
Also, check out how Bush and his Republican NeoCons have wasted the TAX DOLLARS over the 8 years:
http://thinkprogress.org/

Capitalism relies on LACK of planning (the "invisible hand" of Adam Smith's 'The Wealth of Nations") in order to survive. Planning (especially centralized planning) is Socialism and is anti-capitalist at its heart. What people choose to forget is that it was the equal GREED of homeowners who thought they could have their house and eat it too. Why should we protect THEIR irresponsible behavior? (See Obama's 4th point.) Nothing is (or should be) guaranteed. (See his 3rd point.) As for CEO 'rewards', that should be up to the firm, NOT the government (point 2).
As to the other points, it virtually HAS to be a blank check or else you might as well not write it at all. (point 1). As for point 5, I can NOT expect other nations to join us because THEY HATE US and want us to go into the proverbial toilet. As for point 6, the truth appears to be that the more regulation you have, the more firms will spend to do end runs around those regulations. If you had virtually ZERO regulations, there would be no need for sneaky stuff since ALL WOULD BE LEGAL. Thus "rules of the road" would only lead to more financial crises in the coming years. Finally, Main St has to take responsibility for its actions-- THEY should NOT be given a blank check for their sins if the bankers are not treated equally .
Therefore, Obama (as usual for a virtual Socialist) is 100% WRONG ! He is as clueless as is McCain. Neither of them should EVER be allowed to run this country as President!

Barry's a boob, it only took him a week to come up with this. He was too afraid to have a position about the UNELECTED Paulson's plan to "save" our economy because he was afraid to say the wrong thing.

Hey SHAWN. Give the dogma a rest. Markets do fail, especially when there is federal mismanagement (re. fiscal discipline and the interest rate; regulation of banks; &c.) If the banks fail, each and every one of us is going to suffer. We're gonna get the Adam Smith Invisible Hand B**** Slap because the current federal deficit/homeowner loan/credit card Ponzi scheme is collapsing.

The accounting implicit in both the Republican and the Democratic Party platforms is as evasive of reality ? financially irresponsible ? as that of any failed Wall Street company. Who will be the first debate moderator to call them on the fiscal excess inherent in both platforms?
Fixing the financial mess will require a sacrifice from US citizens. Which candidate will have to courage to say so, to ask us to make the sacrifice. i.e., pay higher taxes?
My willingness to do so would be higher if I were confident that some of the financial criminals were going to jail. Which candidate will promise a special prosecutor ? a mean, aggressive one who hates Wall Street fat-cats and softy government regulators as intensely as Kenneth Starr hated Bill Clinton?

This is actually very solid. Much better than McCain's "turn my rhetoric 180 degrees from free market magic deregulation and "the American worker won't pick lettuce for $50 an hour!" to cheap populism, blame a scapegoat, blame my opponent, call for a commission, and put out a vague political device with a great name that will 'solve' this crisis."

ANother example of empty rhetoric here. VOters: here's the bottom line: before you pull the lever, ask yourself: 1)who do I really, really trust to lead a country with terrific problems going forward ? If it's somebody with 18 months of experience, and never had to make a major decision in his life, with a VP running mate who truly despises women and their causes, vote Democrat. GO for the fast talking, used car salesman approach both of them have, because their is nothing else. NO TIME TO EXPERIMENT. Or do we play it much safer, and go with a team that's fought battles on both sides of the aisle, and can navigate thru the tough times we're facing over next few years. GOP team might not be perfect - but Ask yourself - 18 months experience, has never lead or managed anything - or guy who has been around the block many times, with a running mate who has an 82% approval rating, and is a Governor, overcoming tough odds in her state, but at the end, SUCCEEDING. The choice should be clear before you press that lever. NO TIME TO EXPERIMENT on a novice. He'll be much more ready in 2012.

For the record, there is nothing in Adam Smith's Wealth of Nation that refers to blank checks for Wallstreet because businesses are "too big to fail." Not one solitary word.
As for the fundamentalist religion of the invisible hand....the hypocrisy is absurd. Sean writes:
"Why should we protect THEIR irresponsible behavior? (See Obama's 4th point.)"
when he is speaking about home owners. And writes
"As for CEO 'rewards', that should be up to the firm, NOT the government (point 2). As to the other points, it virtually HAS to be a blank check or else you might as well not write it at all."
What insane loophole of logic leads us to believe that homeowners cannot be greedy or they should lose their homes--but Wallstreet should and must be greedy and in return they will earn a blank check from tax payers? Is this a new form of socialist sponsored capitalism--as the newspapers in Brazille put it? What a freaky double standard.
As for Sean's other points:
"As for point 5, I can NOT expect other nations to join us because THEY HATE US"
No. They hate Bush and the lying members of the G.O.P. Remember how scornful Republicans were when Obama was popular in Europe? Will they still be so scornful if his popularity and soft power with other countries results in our economic prosperity? Think. Think. Think.
Wait there's more...
"As for point 6, the truth appears to be that the more regulation you have, the more firms will spend to do end runs around those regulations. If you had virtually ZERO regulations, there would be no need for sneaky stuff since ALL WOULD BE LEGAL."
Are you serious? Why not just legalize crime then criminals won't have to waste their time trying to hide from police officers. This is your argument.
"Thus "rules of the road" would only lead to more financial crises in the coming years."
Having rules of the road helped the U.S. to enjoy incredible economic prosperity in the 1950's, 1960's and pretty much until the deregulation lead to increasing socialism for corporations while ordinary citizens, since Bush took power, have been growing poorer. Also the national debt has nearly doubled.
"Finally, Main St has to take responsibility for its actions-- THEY should NOT be given a blank check for their sins if the bankers are not treated equally . Therefore, Obama (as usual for a virtual Socialist) is 100% WRONG !"
Only if by 100% wrong what you really mean is 100% correct...which given the double speak for the past eight years, I wouldn't be at all surprised.
Time for the G.O.P. to take responsibility for its mistakes, and for a new more reality-based leadership in Washington D.C. Ideologues on either side will drive us into the ditch. We need pragmatism and fair rules for corporations and for citizens.
Obama/Biden 08.

Gilbert, I'd rather have an experienced and capable team, yes. Since I can't have that with either ticket (only one member of each has a really deep resume), I'll have to settle for capable. On that front, Obama wins, because McCain has clearly failed to learn anything from his decades of experience. He's ignorant on economics and he thinks you can fight cronyism by hiring lobbyists. If he hasn't figured out how the market works yet (and he clearly has no clue) he won't do it in the next 4 years either. I'm going to go with the smart one, not the guy who keeps making the same mistakes, thanks.

broad principles = vague generalities
This whole "plan" is what gave us this crisis. The same crooks that write Obama's plan are the ones who sunk Fannie Mae. This is the same braintrust that led to this. This mortgage crap is the result of Clinton plans to literally give away mortgages to people because of skin color or being poor regardless if they had credit or income to deserve it.

Wow - some people just won't get off the partisan wagon.
A friend of mine sent this to me. Maybe we (of ALL political persuasions) should pass this along ? to our ?e-mail lists? AND to our senators and representatives.
Hundreds of billions of dollars have already walked out the door with the people responsible for this, but we don?t have to set them and ourselves up for them to do it again!
Although the U.S. taxpayers will be paying for the funding of the Toxic Waste Dump Fund, we won't have anybody at the table representing our interests when the bill gets drafted ( however, lobbyists for BAC, Goldman,Morgan,Pimco etc. will all be there). Here are some suggestions for what ought to be in the bill (please add your own):
1. Only U.S. domesticated banks are eligble to participate- - no foreign banks or U.S. subsidiaries or affiliates of foreign banks are eligible. No entity that holds MBS for investment purposes only(i.e. hedge funds and mutual funds) are eligible to participate. (The purpose of the Fund is to free up capital to loan to U.S. borrowers- - not to bail out speculative investors.)
2. Any entity availing itself of the Fund can not pay any officer, director or employee more than the annual pay of the highest paid U.S. government civil servant until the Fund recoups 100% of the amounts advanced by the Fund to that entity, together with interest.
3. No officer or director of any entity availing itself of the Fund can sell stock in that entity until the Fund recoups 100% of the amounts advanced to that entity, together with interest.
4. No dividends may be paid by any entity availing itself of the Fund until the Fund recoups 100% of the amounts advanced by the Fund to that entity, together with interest.
5. In the event the Fund does not recoup 100% of the amounts advanced to an entity within a reasonable period (i.e. 3-5 years), the Fund will receive warrants equal to 79.9% of equity securities of such entity.
6. All amounts advanced by the Fund to an entity must be placed in a segregated account and LOANED to customers of that entity at commercially reasonable rates and terms. Such amounts can not be used by the entity for trading or investment purposes (remember were doing this for Mainstreet, not to create the next bubble.)
7. The costs of the Fund(i.e. the temporary federal agency) will be ratably paid for by Fund participants by issuance of warrants in the participating entities or by cash payment.
If an entity is not willing to comply with the above, then they are not eligible to participate.
As it appears that the "Fund" is a done deal, it would be great if we came up with a list of conditions to protect the U.S. taxpayer.

My finances are fundamentally sound. I don't live in a home we can't afford. I drive a 7 year old Lincoln continental, My husband drives a 8 year old Harley Truck. We go out a few times a week. We are retires but not old. We go to Hawaii every couple of years and a cruise every two years. Who are these people that get in such messes???

It takes a lot of nerve for those of you that voted for Bush twice to make any statements at all. You had your chance to move this country forward and instead you've run it into the ground. It's time to accept your failures and let people smarter than you save your ass. You don't even have to say "thank you" or "I'm sorry", just stay out of the way.

What Obama and the Democrats fail to understand is that Wall Street and Main Street are tied to each other. It's easy to blame corporate America for all of our woes. But will the voters of Massachuetts throw Barney Frank out of office for telling Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to underwrite loans for those who couldn't qualify under normal mortgage procedures? Will Democrats throw Chris Dodd, Chairman of the Senate banking committee for the last 2 years out of office for failing to exercise his oversight duties and for being the largest receipient of campaign contributions from Fannie and Freddie? Are voters holding Obama accountable for being the 2nd largest receipient? Will Joe Biden face the music for his revamp of the bankruptcy laws that hurts the little guy on Main Street but protects the big banks like MBNA? We choke on the size of this use of taxpayer dollars, $700Bn to bail out American companies, yet give Obama a pass even though he has a bill in the Senate that would transfer an estimated $800Bn in American tax dollars to reduce global poverty? Will the American voters punish the Democrats for blocking an attempt by Republican in 2005 to reform the rules and oversight of Fannie and Freddie thus allowing this crisis to descend on us all? Now the Democrats want to add another $50+Bn for another stimulus bill? Does everyone understand that it is the middle class that pays that bill? The poor don't pay taxes, and the rich can only be soaked for so much. How will Obama pay for the universal health care he promises all (to include illegal aliens) Somebody please explain how Obama's poll numbers aren't near zero?

The only MARXIST comments I see that Wall Street wants the masses to bail them out. I think that is very MARXIST... so go stuff your capitalistic Republican Butt with that one.
Marxist my ARSE. You guys make me want to puke.

You know... there has been alot of rhetoric on the media lately from the McCain camp on how long it has taken Obama to react to this financial crisis... I'm for one proud of the thinking that has gone on on the obama camp. Yeah... he could have come out with a "I'm against the AIG bailout... and then the next day say... I'm for it... and now... finally against it again." McCain is just plain dumb... he reacts quickly... but it is hardly ever right the first time.
I'll stick with Obama... and take the steady eddy well thought out approach very day.